JAGAT SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused has been convicted under section 394/397 IPC and sentenced to 7 years R.I., being the minimum prescribed sentence under section 397 IPC.

(2.) In brief, the prosecution case is that on 14/11/1984, at about 12 in the mid-night, at Meihar, the complainant, P.W. 1 Munnalal, who is a rickshaw puller, was robbed of the cash on his person by the two persons including the present appellant. As per the complainantTs version before the Court, since the complainant refused to take the two accused in his rickshaw beyond a certain point agreed between them, the two accused persons caught hold of him and by putting a gun on his neck robbed the cash money on his person. The First Information Report was lodged on the third day of the incident i.e. on 16/11/1984, at 9.13 in the night. Complainant P.W. 1 Munnalal explained the delay in lodging the report to the police by stating that it is only after he narrated the incident to his father and again happened to see the accused in market that he had rushed to the police station to lodge the report.

(3.) The conviction of the appellant with a minimum sentence of 7 years mainly rests on the sole testimony of P.W. 1 Munnalal. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-accused submits that in a separate criminal case u/s. 27 of the Indian Arms Act tried by Magistrate, the accused has been acquitted of the charge of illegal possession of arms seized from him after the alleged incident of robbery. The learned counsel for the accused therefore, argued that in this incident, the accused could not be convicted under section 397 IPC. According to the learned counsel, principles of issue estoppel would apply in the case for the benefit of the accused. Reliance is placed on Amritlal Rattilal Mehta v. State of Gujarat